The winner of this year's Fnac France Inter Comic Award is a story about an illustrator

Fnac Darty, a site run by the French books and music retail chain, announced their choice for this year's comics award under their sponsorship:

The graphic novel *Au-Dedans* (Editions 404) has just been named the winner of the 7th edition of the Fnac France Inter Comic Book Award. This debut graphic novel by Will McPhail, an illustrator for *The New Yorker*, is a refreshing and moving story centered on Nick, a withdrawn young city dweller who slowly begins to open up to the world.

Nick is an illustrator whose life oscillates between his personal projects and a day job at an advertising agency. He spends his time in cafés and craft beer bars, aware that something is missing from his life: other people and their inner worlds. Much more than a critique or a simplistic autobiographical account of a millennial’s life among other millennials, this slice of Nick’s life focuses on the divide that separates us all from one another.

It sounds like something even Japanese mangakas could explore, and just the kind of idea even USA creators should. Congratulations to the artist who conceived the tale.

Alex Ross illustrating Marvel Dimensions

Gizmodo's talking about a new Marvel project artist Ross is drawing, with the Golden Age Human Torch prominently featured:

Called Marvel Dimensions, it starts off telling the origins of iconic characters, one of which io9 can exclusively reveal. Below, you can see his take on the birth of the Human Torch—specifically, the Jim Hammond android. Created by Carl Burgos and first appearing in 1939’s Marvel Comics #1, Hammond was made under Marvel’s predecessor, Timely Comics, and stood as one of its “Big Three” alongside Captain America and Namor.

Using Hammond’s longtime sidekick Toro—also made by Burgos, debuting in 1940’s Human Torch Comics #2—Ross establishes what Marvel Dimensions is aiming for and how unlike anything else the android would’ve been to the world in 1930s Marvel. Like in the original comics, Dimensions‘ take on Hammond gradually learns to control his flames and fights Namor before the two help America with “the Big One” that was WWII. [...]

There’s another hook to Dimensions, and that’s the promise of Ross shifting from origin stories to “something darker and more unpredictable.” The specifics of that are under wraps, but the pre-Torch pages tease at what could be. On the moon, a Watcher points out the “notable differences” between different worlds and details that could emerge from additional perspectives like Toro’s. The book features heavy hitters like Spider-Man and the X-Men, and under Ross’ photorealistic hand, they have the potential for stories both illuminating and strange as the synopsis suggests.

Right, because all we need is darkness without light at the end of the tunnel. Seriously, no matter what the setting, it's appalling how they keep doing something that's actually predictable today. And if the Golden Age stories already portrayed Hammond learning to best master his powers, why does it need to be retold in brand new format that badly? Do they think the early art samples are that bad to the point they believe new audiences can't appreciate it, especially in an era where art's become uninspiring? Another example of lacking confidence in how to market older tales to newer audiences.

I don't deny Ross is a talented artist in his own way, but "photorealism" is hardly my cup of tea in an era where phony realism's become the norm too often with woke pandering, and when past stories are emphasized too often, no attention is paid to newer issues that could be challenging. Something they made every effort to avoid for years now. And under current Marvel management, they no longer have the potential to be illuminating, nor strange in a good way.

A new franchise titled "New-Gen"

Variety announced there's a new comic being turned into a multimedia franchise called "New-Gen", which is reportedly distributed by Marvel:

New-Gen Universe, Inc. is launching its first consumer products initiative at San Diego Comic-Con, debuting an exclusive collector’s trading card set made with Cryptozoic Entertainment to celebrate its Marvel-distributed comic series.

Just 300 convention exclusive boxes exist worldwide for the July 23–26 event, making this among the rarest “New-Gen” collectibles released to date. Designed solely for the convention, the set also builds momentum for the upcoming 3D CGI animated series “New-Gen Nanobot Heroes.”

In the comic, twin brothers Sean and Chris learn their bodies have been enhanced by nanotechnology, thrusting them into a fight against the villain Deadalus within a futuristic world where nature and technology exist side by side.

“New-Gen” was created by J.D. Matonti, Julia Coppola and Chris Matonti and has grown from its Marvel-distributed comic book origins into a transmedia franchise spanning publishing, animation and consumer products. The Comic-Con cards give fans a tangible link between the source comics and the animated series still to come.

While I think it's great somebody wants to create their own franchise, and turn it into animation to boot, why must they rely on a publisher as unreliable as Marvel's become for distribution? They're being very foolish there. I wish the creators good luck in selling New-Gen, but would appreciate it much more if they found a different distributor instead. And perhaps if they focused foremost on the comics writing/illustrating, and not get carried away by turning everything into a whole franchise relying on toy merchandise, because that hasn't done many favors for comicdom in the end.

NY creator develops comic based on experience with ADHD

WBNG-12 news talks about a creator from New York who produced a superhero tale building on his experiences with ADHD and bullying:

A Central New York comic book creator spent a decade developing a superhero series inspired by his own experiences with ADHD and bullying, and says the project is aimed at readers who have ever felt like they didn’t belong.

Tyler Raymond is the creator of The Different, a comic series he says is built around the idea that being different is something to embrace, not hide.

Story behind the series

Raymond says growing up with ADHD and being bullied in high school drove him to create something that could uplift others.

“School isn’t easy, especially when you’re different,” Raymond said. “So being the kid that talks too much, it was particularly hard to find friends. I wanted to make something that uplifted others and reinforce the idea that it’s okay being different. And we should all love ourselves for who we are and accepting our flaws because what other people might see as different, I see as something we should embrace and accept.”

The comic’s premise

The series follows five young heroes — Inferna, Celestial, IL GELO, The Stone Golem and Blueprint — who gain extraordinary powers from mysterious alien energy crystals buried beneath the Earth. The team protects Manhattan while navigating personal struggles and learning to function as a family.

Raymond says the central conflict goes beyond fighting villains. In the world of The Different, people fear the heroes trying to save them because of their powers.

“People treat people that have superpowers differently,” Raymond said. “So in Manhattan, when these heroes are saving people, they actually get negative responses, and these people fear them and treat them differently because they have superpowers. So I wanted to make a niche little parallel there. It’s a coming-of-age story; it’s about a group of strangers becoming family and working together to do good while also handling the adversity of being different.”

It's the kind of premise the X-Men for one was known for, but as anybody well-versed in recent history knows, Marvel's since gone downhill with comics like those years ago. So it's to be hoped this independent comic will prove a good successor for mainstream comics that lost their way. I just hope it doesn't build upon extreme left-wing ideologies, metaphorically or otherwise. That will only ruin it.

A superficial article about Doonesbury history, and a sloppy one

Earlier this year in May, The Forward wrote about how cartoonist Garry Trudeau dealt with Jewish-related issues in Doonesbury, mainly spotlighting Mark Slackmeyer, possibly the 3rd regular cast member who debuted shortly after Mike and B.D in 1970:

Trudeau’s “Megaphone Mark” — who sported long hair and a bushy beard —was modeled on Mark Zanger, the leader of the Yale chapter of SDS (Students for a Democratic Society). Mark’s first act in the strip is to take over the office of President King, the WASPy president of Walden College, who was based on the actual Yale president, Kingman Brewster. Over the next few months, Trudeau increasingly used Mark’s clashes with his father Phil, a New Jersey stockbroker desperate for his son to “succeed,” to dramatize tensions within postwar Jewish life.

Phil represents a generation of upwardly mobile Jews who believed acceptance in corporate and suburban America required conformity, restraint and the concealing of ethnicity. Mark, by contrast, is openly confrontational, culturally self-aware, and seems uninterested in assimilationist respectability.

Mark’s Jewish identity was not made explicit until the middle of 1971, when he and his college buddy Mike Doonesbury attend a talk by a famous religious crusader. Asked why he has not yet chosen to join the fold and lead a proper Christian life, Mark deadpans, “I’m Jewish.”

At Yale, Trudeau hardly knew Zanger and had much less in common with him than he had with Kingman Brewster, whose ancestors sailed to America on the Mayflower. Trudeau was descended from three generations of Ivy-League-educated physicians. Like his father, the hardworking family doctor Frank Trudeau, the cartoonist attended St. Paul’s — one of the most blueblood of all New England prep schools. And though the young Yalie, like the genteel Brewster, opposed the war in Vietnam, he wanted nothing to do with radical politics.

But Trudeau identified closely with some of the personal struggles of Megaphone Mark. After all, he was also bucking family tradition by becoming an artist rather than a doctor. As Trudeau told me, some of Mark’s quarrels with his father hit close to home. Consider the line that Phil tells Mark in the fall of 1973: “Life is not to be enjoyed, it’s to be gotten on with!” Those words came verbatim from the mouth of Frank Trudeau, though, the younger Trudeau said, “my father and I ended up getting along pretty well and later came to laugh about such harsh comments.”

A key reason why Trudeau saw a part of himself in his Jewish cartoon character is that this ultimate insider also knew what it felt like to be an outsider. For many American Jews of the postwar era, especially those attending elite institutions historically dominated by WASP norms and values, Jewishness came with a sense of conditional acceptance, of not fully belonging. Trudeau had an emotionally similar experience at St. Paul’s, where he felt deeply estranged from the school’s rigid social hierarchy and its obsessive emphasis on athletic status. As the cartoonist later stressed, his four years there were “a tortured time for me.” He hated the school’s culture and never felt fully at home within it.

While this is interesting history, Trudeau diminished whatever impact it had when in the mid-90s, around January 18, 1994, he wrote Mark telling he was homosexual (with Zonker Harris providing a narrative), which is odd, since, while there was a strip around February 10, 1976 where Joanie Caucus was talking to Andy Lippincott, who told her he was homosexual (Trudeau later wrote him passing away from AIDS in 1990), Mark may not have been established as such at the time. What that would suggest is that Trudeau basically retconned one of his strip's established cast members for the sake of an oh-so vital agenda. It adds nothing to the character, and only makes previously established points moot.

Interestingly, if it matters, I'm not sure there were ever any notable lesbian characters highlighted in the strip, unless we consider a cameo by the real life Rachel Maddow, though that's hardly an achievement if it's not a fictional character who could make a more plausible regular. And if there weren't any recurring lesbian cast members in Doonesbury, it beggars the query - why do only homosexual men matter here? And why, if gay men did matter, Trudeau had to turn an established regular cast member into such, but couldn't create a new one like he did with Lippincott back in 1976? Sometimes, I wonder if comics writers like William Messner-Loebs have to shoulder some blame, since he turned the Pied Piper in Flash gay around 1990, rather than introduce a new character who could fill that role. Arguably, Messner-Loebs was one of the earlier examples of a writer who went "woke" in his approach, and it's certainly led to a lot of damage by this point, with Obsidian from Infinity Inc. being one of the biggest victims, since Gerard Jones, who retconned Todd Rice in 1995, turned out to be a criminal, and a lot of the stories Jones wrote were very bad.

Next up, in the past month, the Los Angeles Review of Books discussed the new history book about the now 56-years-old comic strip, and there's at least a few errors here, such as:

Doonesbury’s Slackmeyer came out as gay in 1976. It seems almost quaint now (and then again, not) that Slackmeyer paralleled rock stars like Lou Reed and Elton John, who felt comfortable enough in their own professional spaces to proclaim their queerness with pride. But this was the very first gay character in comics, and dozens of newspapers simply dropped the strip. Their editorial boards deemed it inappropriate for family reading, as if sexual orientation were inherently salacious. Trudeau refused to apologize or put his character back in the closet. He accepted the economic cost of moral clarity. Not content to be absorbed into the system, Trudeau gladly risked loss of distribution for the sake of truth-telling.

Oops, that's incorrect. It was Lippincott, not Slackmeyer, who was the first gay male character in the strip, perhaps also in all comic strips of the times. Most mystifying, I couldn't find any mention of Lippincott in the article. What gives on that? The glaring historical error aside, where do they get off lecturing everybody homosexuality's literally appropriate for children? Have they by any chance noticed what turned up in school libraries in past years? Do tell us about it. And then, there's another potential error here:

In Peanuts, the adult world feels incomprehensible, their speech reduced to onomatopoeia. In Doonesbury, the adult world tilts hypocritical and borderline psychotic, the source of colossal betrayal and moral rot. When Trudeau deployed abstract visual cues to depict presidents—Reagan as an empty brain, Bush Sr. as a “point of light,” Trump as a sentient toupee—he pointed Schulz’s abstractions at a new target: that power is often visually represented by its absence, by the void where thought should live.

I know Trudeau developed a gimmick where he'd depict some politicians as "invisible men", with certain symbols to replace them (Dan Quayle was depicted as a feather, meant to allude to what Trudeau thought of his personality), but I don't think it included Trump, and certainly not of recent, if the panel from last month says anything. But how disturbing that Trudeau's depicting Trump conversing chummily with a character named Trff Bmzklfrpz, a dictator from a fictional country called Berzerkistan, who's supposed to be murderous and antisemitic. Would he have written a leftist politician maintaining such friendships? Something tells me that, despite this, Trudeau doesn't have anything concrete to say about Trump's administration making a deal with Syria's current dictator, Ahmed al-Sharaa, who was a terrorist before, and there's bleak signs he hasn't changed. All that aside, the "joke" Trudeau made about Trump believing something's been named in his honor is one of the cheapest I've ever seen in the newspaper strip to date. What's that about "incomprehensible" again?

If Mike represented the political sell-out, Mark Slackmeyer represented something more urgent: the moral witness to governmental impunity. Originally a campus radical and DJ at Walden College’s radio station, Mark came out in 1976, a move that became a watershed moment for the funny pages. But the 1980s deepened the crisis. As the Reagan administration ignored the burgeoning threat of AIDS—the president refused to even speak the word in public, and homophobic legislatures debated whether infected people deserved treatment—Trudeau used Mark to bear witness. While Bible-thumpers attacked the “morality” of the afflicted, treating AIDS patients as deserving of their fate, Trudeau faced the grim realities of suffering and death. One 1985 panel still grates: Mark stands at a closed-casket funeral for a lover, his face a hollow, blank mask of exhaustion. The caption: “I’m just so tired of being brave.”

When they repeat the error with Mark's history twice, it starts becoming funny enough to fall off the couch laughing. Why wasn't the establishment of Lippincott as gay considered a "watershed moment", according to their poorly researched effort? That aside, what proof do they have that "bible-thumpers" took such a denigrating position? According to Religion Dispatches, that was far from the case. And why no provision of the 1985 strip in question, so we can ascertain the given year is accurate? The following isn't very accurate either:

When B. D.—the strip’s resident conservative and permanent helmet-wearer—lost his leg in Iraq, 35 years of character history freighted the injury. This wasn’t a policy abstraction; it was a friend’s tragedy. Trudeau became a fixture on Ward 57 of Walter Reed hospital, interviewing veterans and their families, detailing their trials and the government’s responses. Following B. D.’s journey through PTSD, Trudeau earned the title “archangel of Walter Reed” from the military establishment itself.

But here’s the paradox Kendall fails to articulate: Trudeau opposed the Iraq War vehemently, yet his humane treatment of its victims earned him establishment gratitude. When you become a “humanist,” you often lose your “teeth.” The military appreciated Trudeau’s compassion for wounded soldiers even as they pursued policies that kept wounding them. They could separate the caricaturist of their commanders from the chronicler of their suffering. They used his moral clarity about individual pain as cover for endless wars.

Regarding B.D, we once again have an error at hand, or at least a lack of historical clarity: in April 21, 2004, after 34 years, Trudeau drew the guy's helmet being removed after he lost a leg in the Iraq war. On the other hand, I don't think Duke and Ching Huan have been seen without their glasses in all the time they've been recurring cast members. Whatever, it's disturbing how the reviewer turns to claiming wars are "endless" because of the USA's conduct, not because of the foreign autocrat tyrants and ideologies that begin them. Such propaganda only lets savages off the hook, and proves the journal's not altruistic. Also, was Trudeau's reason for opposing the war in Iraq because he didn't think they were as dangerous as Iran's turned out to be? If so, I have yet to find him actually saying so. His turn to victim-blaming in the past decade after the Charlie Hebdo massacre certainly didn't help matters.

In 2014, Trudeau stepped away from his daily grind to work on HBO’s Alpha House, and most papers carried reruns of his greatest hits. He still writes a Sunday strip. Mike’s daughter Alex entered the cast, while the Duke (a play on gonzo journalist Hunter S. Thompson) lived long past his writerly role model to serve as as the proconsul of an Iraqi city. Like Donald Trump, the Duke acts like a monument to the Great American Grift. By the time Trudeau reached the Trump era, satire entered a predicament that made exaggeration almost impotent. Even late-night comics weary of ridiculing Trump, and logic simply vaporizes in the face of his daily harangues. Trudeau’s solution treated Trump as monstrous subtext—an unstable virus distorting his characters’ daily lives rather than a target for direct parody. It was a graceful retreat, but it also admitted defeat.

Sounds like somebody wishes the strip continued daily for longer, if that's what it took to ram Trump for ambiguous reasons. I sometimes wonder if Trudeau stopped drawing daily strips because he had little else to tell in this day and age, and his resort to cheap jokes at this point with Trump certainly proves he's way past his prime.

Doonesbury may have run for a longer time than strips like Peanuts, but has since proven overrated and pretentious, as the swipe at Trump makes clear. Even long before that, from what I could tell, it had long hit bottom. So what good does it do to write up a history book about it when the chances are it won't take an objective viewpoint?

An Indian comic building on imagery from a film

The Times of India announced the production of a concept art comic based on a film titled Ramayana:

Team 'Ramayana' has fans counting down the days to their big trailer launch this week. While kicking off the countdown to July 24 when the official trailer will debut online, fans have been busy turning the film's concept art into impressive first looks.

Following the grand event in New Delhi on Saturday, the makers unveiled a special comic book that offers an in-depth look at the mythology-inspired world of the film. The illustrated book showcases detailed concept art for key characters, kingdoms and locations, giving fans a closer look at the ambitious adaptation. Soon after images from the comic surfaced online, social media users began transforming the illustrations into real-life depictions using AI image-generation tools. [...]

The comic, unveiled during the film's promotional event also offers readers a detailed introduction to the kingdoms of Ayodhya, Mithila and Lanka, while also revealing character illustrations accompanied by brief biographies and mythological backgrounds.

If you think there's a good side to AI, then moviegoers having fun producing AI-generated imagery based on the comic panels that could resemble real life is indeed a better example of how to make use of the concept that's been gaining traction in the past 5 years or so. And a comic emphasizing concept art for the movie is certainly a great idea too.

A review of Frank Miller's new biography

Open Letters Review looked at Miller's new biography, Push the Wall, which may not be that long a book, and in the beginning paragraph, and the editor reviewing it appears to be disappointed, and certainly makes clear what they think of one project that years ago, I wanted to think was Miller's way of telling he'd found a valid subject to write about, until he sadly went the defeatist route several years after:

Writer/artist Frank Miller is legitimately legendary in the field of comic books, firmly stationed in a company of three dozen or so men and women who did landmark work. Miller was the creative genius behind black, nihilistic oddities like Ronin or Sin City, the genius behind signpost superhero stories like Batman: Dark Knight Returns or Batman: Year One, and the genius behind black, nihilistic masterpieces like 300 or the “Elektra saga” run in Daredevil. Any one or two of these would guarantee a creator immortality in the comic book field, so Miller’s status is secure no matter what sloppy, downright cracked work he might add to that body of work, incomprehensible things like Dark Knight Strikes Again or, God forbid, Holy Terror.

Sounds like the reviewer believes Miller should never have tackled the issue of Islamic terrorism, ever. And that's the problem, past, present or future. With the biggest one being that the reviewer doesn't even have the courage to make himself clear about that.

But with that said, is Miller really that "legendary"? Hardly. His obsession with the darkness - which today apparently stops at the most challenging of issues like the aforementioned - is honestly dispiriting, and if he didn't succeed in screenwriting in the long run, why must we believe he's that much of a legend? Lest we forget, he acted as apologist for somebody who definitely won't be one now, and the way he noticably remains fixated on a certain president for cheap reasons is dismaying and divisive.

This kind of status imbues his new memoir, Push the Wall, with inherent interest. The many thousands of comics readers who’ve enjoyed their work would very much like to see similar memoirs from all the other greats of the comics world. How fascinating and valuable it would be, for instance, if we had honest, grappling, detailed memoirs from figures like Bill Everett or Gil Kane or Jack Kirby.

Finishing Push the Wall, some readers will be thinking about how fascinating and valuable it would be if we had an honest, grappling, detailed memoir from Frank Miller. This sure isn’t that.

If the book's a disappointment, I can't say I'm surprised. When a guy turns as defeatist of recent as Miller has, you probably can't expect him to deliver the best of biographical material either, nor for that matter a good instruction in how to illustrate. And his art style's been so mediocre for years, whereas even Kane's art style was more comprehensive just years before he passed on at the turn of the century. But the reviewer's right about one thing: if we had serious biographies about Everett, Kane and Kirby, that could be a lot more interesting than what Miller has to offer at this point.

Miller organizes the book around 18 “lessons” about both life and working in the comics industry, and he fills in the inevitable pabulum of old-man-imparting-lessons with glimpses from his own autobiography: boyhood in Vermont, formative exposure to gritty New York and specifically the Greenwich Village of bygone decades, the initial scrambling in the comics industry, the burgeoning success after Elektra and Dark Knight Returns. And sometimes some of these memories, though decked out in the hack-purple prose that’s characterized Miller’s writing for fifty years, are interesting, particularly the Horatio Alger bits before he hit it big, when he was wandering around a pre-Bloomberg New York that would be all but unrecognizable to the city’s current wall-to-wall 1% inhabitants. “I arrived wide open to the strange gifts of the city’s seedy decline,” he writes in one such passage, “the Sodom and Gomorrah of Times Square, the hard-up characters hanging around fleabag hotels by Port Authority, the graffiti and urban dross in the subway, the misfits skulking in the East Village parks after dark, the crumbling, uneasy feeling of it all.”

Miller might not be the most eloquent of writers, but he’s articulate and sure as hell prolific; instead of tarping over the subject with something like “the crumbling, uneasy feeling of it all,” he could have written that feeling. His book is barely 200 pages; Saga Press would certainly have sprung for another 100.

Gee, that's not much of a page count. Whether this is a biography or an "educational" book, one would think a lengthier book would serve the goal better. Perhaps this does say something about Miller's otherwise overrated talents indeed. Interesting the reviewer alludes to NYC's current residents as "one percent", since based on where they're going lately under Zohran Mamdani, and reelected the disastrous district attorney Alvin Bragg by a comfortable margin, some could make a reasonable argument something is definitely wrong with the Big Apple today, though wealth surely is the least of the problems.

So what’s left are the lessons, and the bits about Miller’s professional life. But the lessons are mostly things Miller himself has very publicly, very repeatedly not followed. “Sometimes you have to work with others to grow,” he writes, for example. “You have to put yourself back into learning, back into wonder, back into some spooky action.” And the anecdotes from the professional comics world are so bland and sanded-down as to be virtually press releases. About his decision to kill off his massively popular character Elektra, he writes:

Exit Elektra. When it came to my decision to end her life, I have to say, it just felt like the right thing to do. Bringing this storyline to a conclusion was the most dramatic thing I could do for the story: the narrative demanded an exclamation point, so I gave it one, in the most lapel-grabbing way possible.

Not mentioned here, however, is that he actually revived her the following year, perhaps because some readers took issue with this, though afterwards, she was mostly in limbo for at least another decade before being put to serious use again, in Daredevil or other comics. By which time, she was depicted as having fully reformed, more or less. And Miller, to my knowledge, was unhappy about the new use for Elektra by that time. But considering how overrated he is in the long run, that's why his complaint is decidedly not worth listening to. And his favoratism for Batman over Superman has long become a cliche among some writers:

Or this, about his decision in Dark Knight Returns to turn Superman into a fascist lapdog:

At the time, Batman suited my creative vision for a superhero much more than Superman. I grew up reading and idolizing Superman. He was my first favorite superhero. But, truth be told, I had gotten pretty sick of the guy. He was just so ridiculously powerful, and his invulnerability reached the point of limiting him as a character for me.

Obviously, “it just felt like the right thing to do” and “I had gotten pretty sick of the guy” are serious disappointments, especially coming from an author who’s gotten a good deal of profitable mileage out of the crafted public image of a straight-talking maverick. There’s precious little maverick straight-talking in Push the Wall, and we’re unlikely to get a more satisfying follow-up. Although it’s at least theoretically possible that Frank Miller could strike again.

So long as he remains as absurdly biased as he's been for goodness knows how long, he won't deliver anything satisfactory, and probably hasn't for longer than we think anyway. I do recall Ronin had a decidedly mediocre ending where the demon called "Agat" turned out to be a robot who was possibly crafted subconsciously by the main protagonist?!? Seriously, that was pretty underwhelming, and defeated whatever fantasy-based premise the miniseries was supposedly built on. And in the end, Ronin was little more than an empty shell.

But what's really disappointing is Miller's superficial view of Superman, one that completely obscures the weaknesses to Kryptonite and magical energies that were established decades ago, if we go by what's quoted from the manuscript. If Miller wanted to, he could've written up a Superman script building on stuff like that for real, and in the end, all he does is insult plenty of hard-working writers and artists who came before him by practically depicting the Man of Steel as minion for fascism. He did something like that with Wonder Woman too in the All-Star imprint title spotlighting Batman & Robin from the late 2000s that only lasted a few years. Miller's inability to acknowledge that the writers are at fault for Superman being "ridiculously powerful" is telling, and if that's how he approaches the whole matter, he's made clear he comes from a generation that didn't make any proper distinctions between reality and fiction.

Another problem with Miller is that he sounds like the kind of scribe who only cares about his own work, and doesn't give a damn what happens with others' work, or how. That's another reason why comicdom fell into such dire straits; nobody respects the past efforts of previous writers and artists with better resumes from up to the turn of the century, and now we have a whole shambles devoid of consistent continuity and characterization in the mainstream for starters. Of course, even those creators have faults, like not showing the guts to take issue with their former workplaces if they feel something wrong was done, or worse, they practically enabled it by participating in degradation of their own creations, as Kane sadly did when he drew 5 of 6 parts of the first, very repellent Green Lantern story in Action Comics Weekly from 1988, where Carol Ferris as Star Sapphire slaughtered Katma Tui, whose death to date was never fully reversed. I don't think Miller's ever complained about whether his own work on Daredevil was disrespected by successive scribes, and so, even though he may be the kind of artist/writer who only cares about his own stories, there's plenty to suggest he still doesn't put much value on what writings he has that did matter. And those writings are decidedly way too few.

As for this new "biography", I think it's worth passing on. It sounds too short, and like Miller hasn't provided enough to think about. Which has got to be another problem with modern creators in the long run.

Canadian filmmaker produces a comic

The Wellington Advertiser wrote about a filmmaker, David Antoniuk, who's now produced a comic book of his own:

Award-winning film director David Antoniuk has always considered himself a writer, and the Guelph/Eramosa resident has now published his first comic book.

“If I could do anything I would sit around campfires telling stories,” Antoniuk told the Advertiser. “In my bones, it’s who I am.”

Shortly after moving to Toronto from Winnipeg to go to film school in 1989, Antoniuk wrote a short story that was published in Ice magazine.

Antoniuk was a young man grappling with age-old questions: “Why are we here? And what happens to us when we die?”

The story explores the question with both comedic and serious tones.

“I never want to preach to people,” Antoniuk said. “I want them to have an enjoyable experience” that gently leads to self reflection.

[...] Nearly four decades later, that story – Time Spent – has taken on a new life in the form of a comic book.

I certainly hope he means it when he says he doesn't want to "preach" to anybody, or lecture them, because there's been too much of that in the past quarter century or more, and it's hurt the entertainment scene very badly. But there's some dismaying news in this item as well:

People can expect to see more from Antoniuk in the near future. He’s working on turning short horror stories by his wife, author Vanessa Ireson, into comic book form and is also co-writing a young adult graphic novel about a group of kids fighting monsters.

After that, he’s set to write another comic book he said will have more in common with Time Spent.

I've said before that the overabundance of horror stories has had a ruinous effect on entertainment, and this is doing nothing to prove contributors to any entertainment medium are trying to move away from that. Even the premise of fighting monsters is enough to wonder if the guy's that obsessed with horror themes. So while I wish I could appreciate a filmmaker trying comics for a change, the part about writing horror stories only dampens the impact.